But, fresh off of Saturday's appearance in Philadelphia, the controversial attorney claims that he has been invited to reprise his VGXPO debate at GDC, which takes place in February in San Jose.

The news comes from a motion filed by Thompson with the U.S. District Court in Florida, where the anti-game activist is suing the Florida Bar. While the document itself is little more than a legal maneuver, the following text caught GP's eye:

This past Saturday I journeyed to the Pennsylvania Convention Center and debated Lorne Lanning, an iconic figure in the video game industry, on the very issues that spawned the Blank Rome/Take-Two SLAPP Bar complaints against me. You can read all about the debate at http://www.gamepolitics.com/.

It appears I did very well, despite heavy security insisted upon by the event, not by me. I was invited, they said, into the “lions’ den.”

In the audience [for] this event, unbeknownst to me, was the man who organizes the largest video game gathering in the world, the Game Developers Conference (GDC), attended by 20,000 folks...

Because of the quality and coherence of my presentation, I was then asked by the GDC to reprise the Philadelphia debate, this time in February in San Francisco in a 5000 seat arena, as the keynote event.

GP: We haven't verified this with anyone connected with GDC as of yet, but we're working on it. Read Thompson's court filing here.

UPDATE: Contrary to what is written in Thompson's court filing, "the man who organizes" GDC, director Jamil Moledina, was not in attendance at VGXPO. Thompson is apparently referring to noted video game composer Tommy Tallarico, who is on the main advisory board of GDC. Tallarico was in attendance at VGXPO, but told GP he did not discuss the debate idea with Thompson personally (see below).

UPDATE 2: GP has just received this statement from the GDC's press representative:

"The Game Developers Conference has not extended an invitation to Jack Thompson to speak at GDC 2008," Jamil Moledina, executive director, Game Developers Conference, said. "We look forward to announcing the full speaker lineup closer to the show."

UPDATE 3: GP has just spoken with Tommy Tallarico about this confusing situation. Tommy, who has attended VGXPO for several years, said that he introduced himself to Jack Thompson before Saturday's debate.

After the [Moral Kombat] movie, I walked up to Jack Thompson and introduced myself... when I started talking to him, honestly, he was quite charming, it was a nice conversation...

After the debate Tallarico had dinner with Lorne Lanning and Spencer Halpin. They discussed the possibility of having a similar debate involving Thompson at GDC. Spencer Halpin's wife, an organizer of VGXPO, broached the possibility of a debate with Thompson by phone and Thompson expressed interest. Tallarico said that he never personally spoke to Thompson about the debate idea. He told GP that he planned to put the idea before the GDC board for consideration:

I was literally writing the e-mail to the advisory board when I got the call... [saying] go to GamePolitics... [where the story had already broken]...

GP: It is, perhaps, unfortunate, but given today's controversy it looks like any potential debate involving Thompson and GDC is a dead issue.

Since this is how the video game industry treats its critics, no wonder it has a public relations problem with parents. This is an industry that lies about the ratings on its products, sells those products to underage kids behind their parents’ backs, and then wants nothing but an incestuous gathering in San Francisco to congratulate itself on how smart it is.

Federal regulation of your industry is coming because you folks simply can’t figure out why parents don’t trust you. Fine. When the regulation comes, and it will, don’t blame me.

GP: In the end, one has to wonder exactly what Thompson hoped to accomplish here. Had the deal been finalized, the GDC event could have been fascinating for attendees and beneficial to Thompson in an image sense. Very little, if anything, was to be gained by adding the prospect of a GDC appearance to the U.S. District Court record, which publicly exposed it to media scrutiny.

Comments

Okay, seriously, can we delete the self-congratulatory press releases about things not related to the topic at hand? I appreciate your feedback and responses to people's questions, here, Jack, really, I do, but the random press release about MH2 being illegal is irrelevant. That, and you've already mentioned it on other threads - it's old news, mate, and hardly even 'news' because there's no actual action taking place, just you asking someone else to do your dirty work for you because your settlement with T2 precludes you from doing so yourself.

Well, I'm sticking to my guns. I still think it's preferable that at least rational discussion is being had, as opposed to 2-min sensationalist scare-the-children soundbytes. Though I must confess, I find myself wondering why the focus seems to have shifted from MH2 is violent to MH2 is sexual? (shrug)

There's only two logical possibilities as to the story. 1) He was invited to GDC, 2) He wasn't. I have no trouble believing that he was, but I have a hard time understanding the real motive, he couldn't possibly be hoping they'll somehow see "the error of their ways". One can't help but wonder what it is he's really hoping to accomplish. That said, I don't see any harm in it. In fact, it's probably preferable to his usual TV appearances.

I'd be delighted to debate Henry Jenkins. Bring him on. Make him my opponent at GDC. We'd have to move to a bigger facility. I pledge to debate him. I'd absolutely love it. Now shut up about how I won't debate people. You're making a fool of yourself, Black Manta.

Benji, I didn't put out any news release on the debate. Are you okay, or what? Dennis McCauley is reporting at this thread a court filing, because what I did in Philly relates to what is gong on down here in Florida.

I have a constitutional right to appear before the Board of Governors of the Bar, to make my case, under certain laws here, to them, as I made my case in Philly for myself. Dennis gets the point, but you dont.

By the way, if Lorne is right that my "business plan" is to just wait for more game-inspired murders to occur, then why am I drafting and getting passed laws to stop the sale of games to the potential murderers. that would dry up my gravy train, right? Ask Lorne about that one.

GP: Lorne got this wrong. As far as I can tell, Jack has no "business" plan.

I've commented before that Mr. Thompson's use of "dark humor" has made me laugh.

I've also been known to laugh at complete absurdity (*see It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia). The Rumplestiltskin remark is so "from out of left field," that my mind is now stuck in an infinite "for loop of depraved LOLness"

A good chuckle at the start of a Monday in my office is a good start to the week.

THIS GUY KEEPS GOING ON ABOUT ROCKSTAR GAMES AND TAKE TWO YOU THINK THEY REALLY GIVE A FUCK ABOUT HIM THAT WHY THEM MAKE FUN OF HIM IN THERE GAMES BECAUSE EVERYONE HATES HIM AND HE THINKS EVERYONE LIKES HIM

Secondly, whether you hate me or not, I've been in this debate since April 1999 when we filed our Doom lawsuit that arose out of the Paducah school massacre.

Thirdly, there are people within the video game industry who actually understand that Take-Two is a bigger problem for the industry than I am! Think about that a second and let it sink it. Warren Specter said so in Montreal two years ago. Even Doug Lowenstein, in a rare moment of truth, said so.

If the industry would speak the truth about the sociopaths at Take-Two, then I would be totally superfluous to all this, and I could crawl back under the rock from whence I allegedly came.

The utter failure of the ESRB, the ESA, and the industry generally to ostracize and shame Take-Two and do anything about that company's illegal/immoral/unethical activities is why I exist to beat the living crap out of them.

Get your act together, video game industry, when it comes to the scofflaws at T2, and I melt away. Until then, I'm the 800 pound gorilla opponent that Take-Two itself created. Deal with it. Be mad at Take-Two, not me. Jack Thompson

Wow. I haven't seen this many JT posts since back when GP was over on LJ. I wonder if thats a good thing or a bad thing. Seriously, if I was a lawyer, I'd be off doing lawyerly things and not playing point-counterpoint with folks.

Anyways, I can't wait to see what happens during the debate. I hope someone will get a chance to record it so we can all watch it later.

Side note: I think the GP server needs to have the time rolled back 1 hour, since according to the post times, it looks like its running 1 hour ahead.

"Get your act together, video game industry, when it comes to the scofflaws at T2, and I melt away. Until then, I’m the 800 pound gorilla opponent that Take-Two itself created. Deal with it. Be mad at Take-Two, not me. Jack Thompson"

You know, that could be partly true. Yeah, we can be mad at Take-Two for making some stupid decisions when it comes to their games. I mean, seriously, all this business about Manhunt 2, and the game itself isn't even that good.

But honestly, Jack, I think we have every right to be mad at you, too, considering all the crap you spit out at us. And yeah, I realize that some of it may be well founded. Yeah, people have been idiots towards you, too, and called you with threats and such. But that doesn't excuse the sheer amount of baseless, hateful blanket statements you've made about us.

You know, I'd fancy a guess that most of us don't even care that you're out to get Take-Two. I'm guessing most of the people here are tired of you simply because of your massive superiority complex. You consider every one of us here to be children, and yet you keep on coming back to belittle us more. If anything, that should speak mountains about YOUR character, not ours.

You know, if you'd actually bother trying to be nice and/or civil once around here, once in a while, instead of saving it for your nice publicity stunts, I don't think you'd have as many problems with us.

It's a simple tactic, really. Just belittle your opponents openly on the internet, where childish ad-hominem could be passed off as an impersonator. Bring them down to your level, so that in a real debate, they'll still be bristling from the wild things you said online. Then, toss up a grappling hook, climb up on your high horse, and hang in there while they fume about not being able to show the public at large your dirty tactics. They'll look petty, while you can keep saintly.

Okay, before we get to the "My dad can beat up your dad" argument, I think we should all calm down.

Now Mr. Thompson, sorry if I seem to point you out from the others, after all you're the one with the opinions I disagree. I can finally agree with you now that you have debated someone with more knowledge of videogames issue than "who of the ACLU?" and some "TV bad boy on Fox?". Althought I find it true that Lorne Lanning gave you some free passes, you at least show that you are willing to debate in front of people who might pose a real challenge to your views.

There are some things I would like to point out though. I wouldnt say you walked out of the VGXPO "praised" your "enemies". More like "hey, this guy is not as crazy as his wikiquote page makes him out to be". As for your "quality" of character here is something everyone can agree on: "Mature videogames should not be played by kids". Although everyone can agree with your "goals" it is because of your methods that we disagree with you (how many times has this been said?) and your methods (which amounts basically to banning some games) also disagree with your "goals" (which are "fine, let the adults play them, not kid" why then ban them?).

I hope you've learned some valuable insight in the debate. Like when everyone that played GTA told you by a show of hand that not one of them thought that killing policemen or prostitutes was the goal of the game. Or like when N'Gai Croal reminded you that a lot of public figures speak publicly about their faith (doesnt George Bush mentions God in every appearance?) without being chastised for it (it's the way you go about it).

I'd like to speak more, but got to go earn a living. I'd like to remind you, that there was a email with some important questions that you refused to answer.

Actually, that's a good point. I was thinking about that myself. If everyone comes in expecting a fire-and-brimstone monster and Jack acts like a regular person, there's a certain easing of tension there that helps radiate a positive light.

Then again, it's also a lot easier to be a troll online when you don't have to face people.

At one point, Thompson said "no one in their right mind would say that a videogame by itself would turn an angel into a demon," but seemed to be splitting his message. At times, his message was about not letting retailers sell violent games to kids, at others it was that violent games make kids trained killers.

I can get that kind of dislexia from Fox...

Lorne messed up my wrongfully assuming that Jack was a money-grubbing lawyer. Instead he's a morality... nazi. (for lack of a better word...) He'll go the reasonable route, and say it's just about parents making the right choice for their kids. And then when pressed, he'll revert back to his "but it turns kids into psychos!" rant.

He pretends to want parental choice, AS LONG as the choice is the one he wants.

He's just like Hillary Clinton in that regards. She wants parents to be able to make a choice, but then still claims that "the village" needs to be able to step in an make the "right" choice should the parents make the "wrong" one. Jack just isn't so direct about it, merely implying that parents who make the "wrong" choice instead are destroying their kids' brains...

If it's all about empowering parents Jack, why claim it turns kids into serial killers? And if it's all about kids becoming serial killers, why allow parents the opportunity to buy this at all?

Mr. Jack Thompson, what is your personal stance on violent video games? Do you feel the game should be banned all together or do you feel the games should be federally held accountable according to their ratings?

This is the only site I know you visit frequently, this is why I asked the question here. Plus I feel your answer would have some insight for other people as curious as I am.

JACK THOMPSON SAYING TAKE 2 ARE SOCIOPATHS AND A PROBLEM TO THE INDUSTRY, BECAUSE THEY MAKE VIOLENT GAMES GROW UP AND SPOT ACTING LIKE A FOOL TAKING PEOPLE TO COURT FOR NOTHING THATS WHY ALL THE LAWERS AND JUDYS HATE YOU

I can answer this for you, he thinks Mature rated videogames should not be played by kids. To make sure of that he thinks that "games should be federally held accountable according to their ratings" and for some other games (like Bully and Manhunt 2) he seeks to have them banned.

Then again, it’s also a lot easier to be a troll online when you don’t have to face people.

Oh he's a jerk on TV too. See any "fair and balanced" interview where he spends the whole time shouting down his opponent rather than let him speak.

The internet troll is merely an extension of that. My theory is the greater the separation between a real-life meeting and whatever he's doing, the greater the confrontation and overall arseholishness.

That was my initial thought, that maybe it wasn't really Jack, but all the posts sound similar in style to what we've seen verified by Jack before, and GP is probably checking the IPs on each one I would assume. He usually seems to be fairly careful about that. I know its not infallible, but I doubt that GP wouldn't check them after THAT many posts.

Jack said:
"...and getting passed laws to stop the sale of games to the potential murderers..."

Doesn't that imply that he already sees gamers as murderers before the games even get into their hands? This guy has a preconceived notion that gamers are bad, even before the violent games make it to their hands, and that the games are all they need to start pulling the trigger. How can he be taken seriously when he arrives at a debate or comments section with his mind already made up?

If you are so willing to debate people, why are you not able to respond to an email requesting a serious open dialog? It has been nearly a week and not a single response from you.

It would seem that with all the time you spend posting on Game Politics, you could find the time to respond to an email or two.

Also, Why should we punish Take Two or Rockstar? They have done nothing wrong. They have caused controversy and made a couple of mistakes on the business side, but they have not broken any laws or contracts. Hot Coffee happened before the full disclosure clause was added and Manhunt 2 was found to have not broken any part of the ratings agreement. So again, Why should we punish them?

Hackangel, that was a nicely written post, and I definitely agree with what you said about the need for both sides to respect each other. I think it would help if some people stopped and looked at stuff that we have in common with Jack Thompson. Obviously, most of us care about children, and I personally feel that there are many games children shouldn't be playing without parental knowledge and consent. I think the ESRB ratings need to be enforced more effectively for them to have a better meaning. Some places enforce them, others don't, and for all I know it just boils down to whether or not the individual employees care to enforce it. There are similarities, we just prefer to look at the differences and point those out, like how I don't agree with Mr. Thompson's methods, and I feel that he takes things a bit too far sometimes. However, there are still some common goals in there that people should look for instead of just blindly ranting against him like an idiot and instantly rejecting ideas solely because they came from Jack Thompson...

It is silly to think that parents have a greater understanding of what entertainment is best suited for their child? It is silly to think that parents know their child better than the government or some third party? It is silly to think that a parent has the power to take away a game that they told their child they could not have?

If you really think that parents are so powerless to control the media intake of their child, I really feel sorry for your son as I know he is not being raised by a sensable human being.

Eh, standing up to epeens or filing motions so the epeens can voice their opinion. I'm glad to see JT arguing with people in the comments section.

@ JT: You mentioned that Dennis didn't attend the convention, but he said he did (not to mention the proof). No retraction?

Also, this seems to be the same angles you've taken in the past to be a nuisance. I understand you're sticking to your convictions (bravo), but do you spend any spare time to think of more creative ways to approach your perceived problem? Google employees spend plenty of creative time to develop ideas. It might be beneficial.

I'm not here to berate you or stoop to name calling levels, but your actions just seem to fail to be constructive at the very least. I'd like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but I'm not seeing it yet. I'm actually impressed you'd defend yourself to a bunch of non-people online, but that's far from saying you've been impressive in your conduct over the past few years (including your countless defeats).

I have a question for you, Jack. I've asked you this before, but you've never answered.

You've authored bills which have proven to be un-Constitutional and have cost the states that made the mistake of passing them hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, particularly Louisiana (which is essentially stealing the money from people who still need relief from Hurricane Katrina damages).

When do you intend to reimburse the money from what is essentially your mistake?

For what it's worth. I'm one of them. I'm of the humble opinion that Rockstar's games aren't high enough quality to offset the PR damage they do; I wouldn't cry about it one bit if they closed down. Keep in mind, though, I'd close Rockstar down, not Take2.

With that said. Hate is a strong word. I think you'd find that if you dialed your behavior back somewhat, stopped being quite so belligerant and insulting, and engaged in more rational dialog, I think allot of people might not quite be so quick to whip out the mob torches. I don't think anybody here seriously expects to go buy a xbox and start working on your gamerscore with us, but by the same token; you can't realistically expect us to completely renounce something we've been doing for decades.

Well, if the GDC thing is true, congratulations. Maybe if you start doing more events like that you can persaude people instead of bludgeoning everyone who doesn't agree with you to death with subpeonas. It's more civil, and certainly preferable.

About GDC, I am hoping to go. Right now I am not sure where the finances will come from though and it being in February does not help that in any way. If I do get the chance to go, I will gladly have an IBC.

“… when it comes to the scofflaws at T2, and I melt away. Until then, I’m the 800 pound gorilla opponent that Take-Two itself created. Deal with it. Be mad at Take-Two, not me. Jack Thompson”

Umm… nope Take 2 didn’t create you. In fact you say you have been doing this since 1999 with Doom which was not created or published by Take 2. So please keep in mind what you have said before and keep the flow of your story constant, it makes it more “believable”.

However, there are still some common goals in there that people should look for instead of just blindly ranting against him like an idiot and instantly rejecting ideas solely because they came from Jack Thompson…

It's hard sometimes. I think parents should have a choice. He seems to think parents (and himself) are being assaulted by the greatest conspiracy since the Illuminati and the Masons. I think kids can differentiate between fantasy and reality. He thinks kids are drooling idiots. I think supporting evidence should actually be supporting. He only cherry picks soundbytes, or stretches the truth (see quotes relating to Secret Service findings on Columbine, or refusing to acknowledge the APA study's co-chair clarifying the statements about there being no claim of causation, or being snotty at the Swedes just because their medical community doesn't agree with him)

Shout box

Infophile: @Matt: Apparently Dan Aykroyd actually is involved. We don't know how yet, though, but he's apparently going to be in the movie in some way.08/02/2015 - 4:17am

Mattsworkname: I still hold that not having the origonal cast invovled in any way hurts this movie, and unless the 4 actresses in the lead roles can some how measure up to the comic timing of the origonal cast, i just don't see it being a success08/02/2015 - 12:46am

Mattsworkname: Mecha: regardless of what you think of it, GB 2 was a finanical success and for it time did well with audiances ,even if it wasnt as popular as the first08/02/2015 - 12:45am

MechaTama31: I think they're better off trying to do something different, than trying to be exactly the same and having every little difference held up as a shortcoming. Uncanny valley.08/01/2015 - 11:57pm

MechaTama31: Having the original cast didn't do much for... that pink-slimed atrocity which we must never speak of.08/01/2015 - 11:56pm

Mattsworkname: Andrew: If the new ghostbusters bombs, I cant help but feel it'll be cause it removed the origonal cast and changed the formula to much08/01/2015 - 8:31pm

Andrew Eisen: Not the best look but that appears to be a PKE meter hanging from McCarthy's belt.08/01/2015 - 7:34pm

Mattsworkname: You know what game is a lot of fun? rocket league. It' s a soccer game thats actually fun to play cause your A Freaking CAR!08/01/2015 - 7:02pm

Mattsworkname: Nomad colossus did a little video about it, showing the world and what can be explored in it's current form. It's worth a look, and he uses text for commentary as not to break the immerison08/01/2015 - 5:49pm

Mattsworkname: I feel some more mobility would have made it more interesting and I feel that a larger more diverse landscape with better graphiscs would help, but as a concept, it interests me08/01/2015 - 5:48pm

Andrew Eisen: Huh. I guess I'll have to check out a Let's Play to get a sense of the game.08/01/2015 - 5:47pm

Mattsworkname: It did, I found the idea of exploring a world at it's end, exploring the abandoned city of a disappeared alien race and the planets various knooks and crannies intriqued me.08/01/2015 - 5:46pm

Andrew Eisen: Did it appeal to you? If so, what did you find appealing?08/01/2015 - 5:43pm

Mattsworkname: Its an interesting concept, but it's not gonna appeal to everyone thats for sure,08/01/2015 - 5:40pm

Andrew Eisen: That sounds horrifically boring. Doesn't sound like an interesting use of its time dilation premise either. 08/01/2015 - 5:36pm

Mattsworkname: an observer , seeing this sorta frozen world and being able to explore without any restriction other then time. no enimes, no threats, just the chance to explore08/01/2015 - 5:34pm

Mattsworkname: Andrew: I meant lifeless planet, Time frame is an exploration game. Your dropped onto a world which is gonna be hit by a metor in 10 seconds, but due to time dilation ,you actually have ten minutes, so you can explore the world, in it's last moments, as08/01/2015 - 5:32pm